Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Cloud Security

7/30/2019
01:05 PM
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
50%
50%

Kubernetes Won't Get Secure Just Sitting There

Let's delve into containers.

StackRox wants you to be thinking about containers. Since they secure containers and Kubernetes environments at scale, this is not surprising. But its report of how 392 respondents reacted to a survey on the state of containers may have some insight for everyone.

One insight they evoke is that "In just six months, the percentage of respondents using Kubernetes has grown from 57% to 86%, a 50% increase... Just six months ago, close to half of respondents (43%) were not using Kubernetes in any of its forms. In our survey today, only 14% are not using Kubernetes."

They also say that more than half (51%) of the respondents who use Kubernetes said they self-manage at least some of their Kubernetes clusters, while 21% use nothing but self-managed Kubernetes. Not only that, nearly a third (31%) of all respondents who use Kubernetes say that they use nothing but a single managed service, while 17% of respondents who say that they running Kubernetes will use it in a managed form across two or more managed services. That 17% also has a zero unmanaged count.

Growth has continued unabated. The percentage of organizations with more than 50% of their containers running in production has increased according to the report from 13% to 22%, which is a growth rate of 70%. In the same six months, those running less than 10% of their containers in production has fallen from 52% to 39%.

The report also says that two thirds of respondents will manage at least some of their own clusters as well as using a managed cloud service or a managed distribution.

Somewhat surprisingly, 40% of respondents are managing all of their clusters themselves. Only 20% of all respondents manage their clusters using just their cloud provider's managed service, while only 6% of respondents use only a standalone distribution for management.

It may well be that the organization is running native Kubernetes rather than a cloud provider's managed instance to maintain a consistency in managing all their Kubernetes clusters across their multiple environments.

That kind of consistency is needed in a multiple-venue environment. The instantiation may be composed of secured code, yet it also requires work flows, processes and security tooling to create and enable integration across groups.

Mark Bouchard of the AimPoint Group also had this to say in the report: "Three findings from this survey really stand out to me. One, organizations are adopting containers and Kubernetes without having mapped out how they'll secure the infrastructure. Two, whatever security approach they adopt must effectively protect that infrastructure in hybrid deployments. Three, effective security approaches must deliver rich capabilities across a broad array of features. Organizations should feel a tremendous sense of urgency to test and deploy container security solutions that will effectively protect their cloud-native apps."

While a company like StackRox that provides these kinds of security solutions is sure to emphasize their need, they still have a basically valid point. Organizations have adopted containers and cloud orchestral systems rather willy-nilly. It's past time for that organization to have all the needed supporting infrastructure present in their deployment to cover the everyday security problems that they will face.

— Larry Loeb has written for many of the last century's major "dead tree" computer magazines, having been, among other things, a consulting editor for BYTE magazine and senior editor for the launch of WebWeek.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-5329
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-29
Dell EMC Avamar Server contains an open redirect vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker may exploit this vulnerability to redirect application users to arbitrary web URLs by tricking the victim users to click on maliciously crafted links.
CVE-2020-5353
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-29
The Dell Isilon OneFS versions 8.2.2 and earlier and Dell EMC PowerScale OneFS version 9.0.0 default configuration for Network File System (NFS) allows access to an 'admin' home directory. An attacker may leverage a spoofed Unique Identifier (UID) over NFS to rewrite sensitive files to gain administ...
CVE-2021-21538
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-29
Dell EMC iDRAC9 versions 4.40.00.00 and later, but prior to 4.40.10.00, contain an improper authentication vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability to gain access to the virtual console.
CVE-2021-21546
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-29
Dell EMC NetWorker versions 18.x,19.x prior to 19.3.0.4 and 19.4.0.0 contain an Information Disclosure in Log Files vulnerability. A local low-privileged user of the Networker server could potentially exploit this vulnerability to read plain-text credentials from server log files.
CVE-2021-20505
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-29
The PowerVM Logical Partition Mobility(LPM) (PowerVM Hypervisor FW920, FW930, FW940, and FW950) encryption key exchange protocol can be compromised. If an attacker has the ability to capture encrypted LPM network traffic and is able to gain service access to the FSP they can use this information to...